Ok, I list the difference based on my experience:
5D II with OM80/4 has very little or no flare, it is a big problem for Nikon
scanner at least since LS2000. Film flatness is not a problem with 80/4 stop
down to F11 but a problem for Nikon due to shallow DOF. The workflow with 5D
II need full time attention but it is much much faster than the already very
fast Nikon.
On the other hand the Nikon gives very accurate color (for slides). With the
5D II, the scan always need adjustment, it require some experience but won't
take too long to adjust one (around 2-3 minutes).
Nikon has IR dust removal but 5D II not, it is a major problem even it is
not so dust sensitive as the Nikon LED light source.
Nikon may have some edges on the resolution but in practical they are very
similar.
Nikon software is very good in render highlight details for both negative
and slide (not with Vuescan), with 5D II it need some highlight compression
(like PS highlight/shadow control) to get the same result.
That's what I can think of at the moment. Now my Nikon's 1394 interface is
failed, I have no choice :-(
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Norcutt" <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Why are you happy using the 5D II? Does it work better than a scanner,
> equal, not as good but still good enough and easier to do?
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
> On 4/27/2013 11:56 PM, C.H.Ling wrote:
>> I see some scanner flare there, problem seems didn't solve from 4000ED to
>> 5000ED.
>>
>> C.H.Ling - now happy copying with 5D II and OM 80/4 :-)
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|